You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The above link shows the combination of a number of semiconductor technologies applied to make a high efficiency solar cell. I feel the key is achieving an index of refraction that gives the advantages of a mobile panel that tracks the sun in a flat fixed panel to some degree. This combined with multiple gate solar cells should allow solar to achieve grid parity in the next few years. I also feel in that time frame batteries will advance as well as the systems that control them to the point that in many areas and installations not attaching to the grid will be a viable option. This will especially help poor countries in having to build a much less costly grid as cell phones helped them avoid a much more costly fixed wire communications grid. It will also foster competition by breaking the monopolies of that the utilities have fully taken advantage of to pay for their gross inefficiencies, waste, fraud and pay offs to politicians for the right to abuse the rate payers.
The semiconductor/mems industry is not just about technology, but a philosophy that ruthlessly attacks problems and challenges with an open mind at an ever accelerating rate, while at the same time reducing costs and increasing performance. I can only hope that this same ethos will someday spread throughout our entire economy and especially our government.
In my cursory reading about solar cells it sounds like the Chinese have flooded the market with low-cost units, driving many suppliers out of business. How will the present over-supply effect the sales of any new PV system?
Daniel, The largest cost of solar is the installation and finding suitable space. The higher efficiency and the ability to produce power over a longer part of the day due to index of refraction issues and utilizing a wider range of frequencies mean a smaller panel. It also means if mounted on a moving mount the cost is directly proportional to the size of the panel. I just read of a rather dramatic increase in lithium battery efficiency and life span that might play a significant part in the battery side of the equation. The link is below. Also I see phones and other devices with their own solar panels. In the future I see van type cars with large flat roofs and also electric boats among other things.
Latest, This morning Barron's published that solar will reach grid parity in 47 states in 2016. As soon as the battery technology catches up we will see true competition in the utility space.
Here a link to the latest (Feb 2015) analysis of the grid parity price of current and projected PV at various places around the world (also US), both the report and slides:
Solar power is already cost-effective: In the sunny, desert country of Dubai, a long-term power purchase contract was signed recently for 5 cents per kilowatt hour, while in Germany large solar plants deliver power for less than 9 cents. By comparison, electricity from new coal and gas-fired plants costs between 5 and 10 cents per kilowatt hour and from nuclear plants as much as 11 cents.
Things are moving fast, and that wind power (!) is also very much needed besides PV.....although a total analysis of Germany in 2014 shows that fossil fueled power plants may be still needed for a while...
Where I live the local utility PG&E has the Public Utilities Commission as it's lapdog as documented in emails and other sources. This has allowed them to prey on the people instead of serve them. They are run for the benefit of politically powerful employees and the management.
It's their high distribution costs that really add to the bill. They are currently under investigation and several law suits for blowing up a neighborhood. Some may have since been settled. Their behavior has literally been criminal. It will be nice to have a real alternative of going off grid, but this will require good batteries. Just lowering the marginal cost of power substantially will hopefully change their way. This is where technology does good things and gives people true options to protect themselves instead of relying on government agencies that have been bought. Who ever thought technology would actually reduce corruption? The semi industry has been a major force in increasing transparency with the cell phone and data centers for social networks.
Re Germany I hear from our wafer fab customers that electricity costs in Germany are really hampering them. Any ideas on why given the above link about solar and wind cutting costs?
Fred, CSP's are concentrated solar panels that concentrate the sun on a much smaller semi cutting costs that way. This allows for such things as more expensive triple junction semis so you pick up different wave lengths, which also extends the solar day for some frequencies have a longer day due their superior penetration of the atmosphere. The problem is they usually need to be mounted on a movable panel that points at the sun. If you can shrink the panel by increasing efficiency this helps, but you still need a movable mount or a lens or light guide to gather the light. One way of increasing even that efficiency is to use the heat to heat hot water or air. They do this in Israel and achieve peak efficiencies of 90% plus.
Merkel is a scientist (PhD in physical chemistry) and takes the long view. Here a `complaining` article from the WSJ
on why the electricity costs are currently high in Germany (and indeed Infineon is complaining about some 25 MEuro extra costs):
Nonexempt companies also complain of the disparity. "Whereas some sectors are exempt from the renewable-energy surcharge, high-tech companies have to bear an additional burden," Infineon Technologies AG Chief Executive Reinhard Ploss complained to investors earlier this year. Mr. Ploss said his company, Germany's largest chip maker, would pay €25 million less in Austria for the power it uses in Germany this year.
Even with the power surcharge German exports and German businesses are doing just fine, an economy powering along with a balanced government budget (surplus for a couple of years now) and low unemployment. In the Dutch golden age (17th century) there was a VOC building, now a bar downtown in Amsterdam, with the following
sign, see picture below (roughly translated, `no pain no gain`):
Fred P, I see no reason CSPs can't be scaled, they are just another type of solar panel, to get really high efficiency during the full day, they needed to be pointed at the sun on a movable mount. The only other option I see is if there was some way to just move a light guide, but I'm not sure how much this would cut efficiency, but it might be cheaper than moving the whole panel.
But isn't there now lots of legacy systems that will never be affordable? I think the government subsidies have distorted the market are the wrong way to go. Wouldn’t it be beater for the government to fund the basic research?
You might argue but look at all the emissions we have avoided but the truth is there has been very little saved.
Some of the better systems reach grid parity where I live because they have tiered rates as high as 0.40 per kilowatt hour. The local utility is know as Pigs Graft and Extortion, a title they richly earned. They took money earmarked for gas pipeline maintenance and spent it on employee pay and executive bonuses instead, then a gas pipeline blew up in San Bruno killing many, injuring many and destroying a neighborhood. The emails between the PUC and PG&E firmly established a pattern of corruption. I don't like to say such negative things in a forum, but in this case PG&E has more than earned it. We have had some of the highest rates in the nation for some time.
But isn't there now lots of legacy systems that will never be affordable? I think the government subsidies have distorted the market are the wrong way to go. Wouldn’t it be beater for the government to fund the basic research?
You might argue but look at all the emissions we have avoided but the truth is there has been very little saved.
Merkel does fund basic research very well (again taking the long view), see here her 2015 budget, where it states about the
energy policy:
[h=2]Energy Transition Remains a Major Challenge[/h]By the amendment to the Renewable Energy Law in 2014, the Federal Government created important framework conditions for the restructuring and expansion of Germany's energy supply, said Merkel. She emphasised that the goal of working out the cost dynamics of the transition to alternative energy sources remained a long-term undertaking. What matters, she said, is not just securing energy supply but also making sure it is affordable. As a result, said Merkel, the energy transition is one of the most important investments in the country. Further grid expansion must be clarified and must be accelerated. She added that the pro and contra of a capacity market must also be discussed; moreover, the energy transition must be brought into line with climate protection.
This article does not indicate that renewables are sustainable(profitable) just that the current regulatory environment make conventional power unprofitable.
Indeed, the second option mentioned in the above youtube interview, i/e. playing for regulatory means to `kill solar grid parity'
in order to delay the 'Kodak moment' for traditional (fossil-fueled) utilities, seems to be what (some?!) American utilities companies are going for.
Lets see how this `free market` battle will play out the coming years in the US....
